Government professor warns that Supreme Court's involvement in the election could tarnish its credibility

Posted 12/11/00

Commentary by a member of the Dartmouth faculty

"Surely the record teaches that no useful purpose is served when the judges seek all the hottest political caldrons of the moment and dive into the middle of them."

What Professor McCloskey wrote of the U.S. Supreme Court is as true now as it was when penned in 1960. And as it seems increasingly likely that the Supreme Court will play an important role in deciding who the next President of the United States will be, the Court and the nation should think carefully about McCloskey's warning.

In accepting (and presumably deciding) Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court runs a risk of damaging itself as an institution. The legitimacy of the Supreme is based at least in part on the belief of citizens that the Court is above politics. The 5-to-4 split along ideological lines in the decision to accept certiorari in Bush v. Gore, and the probable 5 to 4 split along similar ideological lines in any decision on the merits of the case, would call this legitimacy into question.

A close decision in a case involving "the hottest political caldrons of the moment" is potentially harmful to the Court and the nation.

-- Nancy Crowe